‘Venerable Nāgasena, it was said by the Blessed One: “In respect of the truths, Ānanda, the Tathāgata has no such thing as the closed fist of a teacher who keeps something back.” But on the other hand he made no reply to the question put by the son of the Māluṅkya woman. This problem, Nāgasena, will be one of two ends, on one of which it must rest, for he must have refrained from answering either out of ignorance, or out of wish to conceal something. If the first statement be true it must have been out of ignorance. But if he knew, and still did not reply, then the first statement must be false. This too is a double-pointed dilemma. It is now put to you, and you have to solve it.’

‘The Blessed One, O king, made that first statement to Ānanda, and he did not reply to Māluṅkya-putta’s question. But that was neither out of ignorance, nor for the sake of concealing anything. There are four kinds of ways in which a problem may be explained. And which are the four? There is the problem to which an explanation can be given that shall be direct and final. There is the problem which can be answered by going into details. There is the problem which can be answered by asking another. And there is the problem which can be put on one side.

‘And which, O king, is the problem to which a direct and final solution can be given? It is such as this—"Is form impermanent?” “Is sensation impermanent?” “Is idea impermanent?” “Are the conditions impermanent?” “Is consciousness impermanent?”

‘And which is the problem which can be answered by going into details? It is such as this—"Is form thus impermanent?” and so on.

‘And which is the problem which can be answered by asking another? It is such as this—"What then? Can the eye perceive all things?”

‘And which is the problem which can be put on one side? It is such as this—"Is the universe everlasting?” “Is it not everlasting?” “Has it an end?” “Has it no end?” “Is it both endless and unending?” “Is it neither the one nor the other?” “Are the soul and the body the same thing?” “Is the soul distinct from the body?” “Does a Tathāgata exist after death?” “Does he not exist after death?” “Does he both exist and not exist after death?” “Does he neither exist nor not exist after death?”

‘Now it was to such a question, one that ought to be put on one side, that the Blessed One gave no reply to Māluṅkya-putta. And why ought such a question to be put on one side? Because there is no reason or object for answering it. That is why it should be put aside. For the Blessed Buddhas lift not up their voice without a reason and without an object.’

‘Very good, Nāgasena! Thus it is, and I accept it as you say?’

Here ends the dilemma as to keeping some things back.